If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Went to vs has gone to

Hi all,

I am unsure what the difference is between these two sentences:

1. She went to prison.

2. She's gone to the prison.

In both cases, she is now in prison, right?

Is the difference only in tense, i.e. in the first case this happened in the past, and in the second this also happened in the past, but it could've been very recently, so as to have a connection with the present?

Re: Went to vs has gone to

The second sentence is in the present perfect and not in the simple past. You must use appropriate time expressions to notice the difference in the sentences. For example:She went to prison a few years ago. ( She might not be in the prison by now)She has gone to prison recently. (She is now in the prison)

Please note I am not a professional teacher. You may wait for comments from our experts.

Re: Went to vs has gone to

"She wasarrested after the incident last night, and is now waiting for her release."

Without the definite article:The general idea of "prison", not a specific location. Here prison is referred as an institution.

2. She's gone to the prison.

I'm inclined to say that the definite article here alters the meaning.'THE' prison shows that a particular location is meant, the building as such.

"She has just gone to the prison to see her imprisoned husband. So she's not at home at the moment."

In both cases, she is now in prison, right?

Is the difference only in tense, i.e. in the first case this happened in the past, and in the second this also happened in the past, but it could've been very recently, so as to have a connection with the present?

You are right with your suggestion as regards the tenses. For more see here:

Re: Went to vs has gone to

The present perfect (e.g., has gone) places focus on the event, not the time when the event happened. As a result, the meaning is expresses could be 'before' or 'recently'.

2. She's gone to the prison.

a) She has gone to prison before, and is on her way there now She is not in prison at the moment.

b) She has recently gone to prison, and is still there now.

The simple past places focus on when the event happened, which is why time can be specified:

1. She went to prison... But when?

a) She went to prison 5 years ago and is no longer there now.

b) She went to prison 5 years ago and is still there now.

The simple past and the present perfect can express the same meaning; however, with the present perfect, having to state or assume the time something happened is not necessary, because the perfect focuses on events, not time. So, for example, if someone asks you if you read the latest Harry Potter book, you could answer, "Yes, I have" or "No, I haven't", both of which refer to the event, read a Harry Potter book, not to the dates that you actually read it, because you wouldn't know or it'd take time to think about.

Re: Went to vs has gone to

Originally Posted by Metathron

Hi all,

I am unsure what the difference is between these two sentences:

1. She went to prison.

2. She's gone to the prison.

In both cases, she is now in prison, right?

Is the difference only in tense, i.e. in the first case this happened in the past, and in the second this also happened in the past, but it could've been very recently, so as to have a connection with the present?

Thanks you.

She went to prison.No 'THE' before prison.She was interned in prison undergoing prison sentence.
She has gone to THE prison.She has gone to see her relatives or friends in prison .
TENSE :She went to prison . She is not in prison now.
She has gone to prison .PRESENT PERFECT.a PAST ACTIVITY ;SOMEWAY CONNECTED WITH THE PRESENT.